Development of the positive–negative asymmetry effect: in‐group exclusion norm as a mediator of children's evaluations on negative attributes

Abstract

(2007) Development of the positive-negative asymmetry effect: In-group exclusion norm as a mediator of children's evaluations on negative attributes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37 (1). pp. [171][172][173][174][175][176][177][178][179][180][181][182][183][184][185][186][187][188][189][190] According to social identity theory (SIT: Tajfel & Turner, 1986) intergroup bias is achieved as a result of individual's striving for positive social distinctiveness, in the context of some in-group identification and the salience of an in-group versus out-group categorization. In this account positive distinctiveness can be created independently of the valence of the attributes to be assigned. Recent research has shown that us-them categorization results in less social discrimination when negative rather than positive attributes are allocated between groups (Blanz, Mummendey, & Otten, 1995;Buhl, 1999;Gardham & Brown, 2001;Otten, Mummendey, & Blanz, 1996). This phenomenon has been termed the 'positive-negative asymmetry effect' (PNAE: Mummendey et al., 1992). Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 37, 171-190 (2007) European Journal of Social Psychology Received 15 December 2004 Accepted 16 January 2006The present research examined when and why children might show intergroup bias on positive, but not negative, valence attributions. Significantly, development of the PNAE has been relatively ignored in previous research on children's intergroup attitudes. The findings of a few studies suggest children are sometimes more willing to differentiate between groups on positive attributes and much less reliably show intergroup discrimination on negative attributes (Bennett et al

Learning to control ethnic intergroup bias in childhood

“…factor in children's developing ability to control of their explicit ethnic intergroup attitudes Rutland, 2004;Rutland et al, 2005;Rutland, Brown, Cameron, Ahmavaara, Arnold, & Samson, 2007). Research on adults also suggests that they are motivated to control intergroup bias due to specific egalitarian social norms (e.g., Monteith, Deenan, & Tooman, 1996;Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson, & Howard, 1997;Lowery, Hardin, & Sinclair, 2001;Towles-Schwen & Fazio, 2003;Dasgupta & Rivera, 2006).…”

“…Developmental psychologists have recently begun to demonstrate that group norms affect young children's explicit ethnic intergroup attitudes (Apfelbaum, Pauker, Ambady, Sommers, & Norton, 2008;Rutland, 2004;Rutland et al, 2005;Rutland et al, 2007). For example, found that 7-year-old children only showed explicit ethnic prejudice when either a pro-prejudice norm and/or an out-group threat was made salient.…”

Understanding the Selection Bias

“…Only positive traits were included because developmental research indicates that children older than seven years are less willing to discriminate between social groups in terms of negative dimensions, whereas they will do so in terms of positive traits (e.g., Rutland et al 2007). All items were relatively normally distributed around the midpoint of the answer scale and the interitem correlations were below .90 with a few exceptions.…”

Group size, group status and trait valence as determinants of intergroup bias: Stereotyping in Finland and Sweden

“…Among the different explanations offered for the PNAE, it is the normative account which has so far received most support (Amiot & Bourhis, 2003, 2005aRutland et al, 2007). The normative explanation assumes that certain discriminatory behaviours (e.g.…”

“…attributing less positive characteristics) are seen as less inappropriate (Gardham & Brown, 2001). However, it has been shown that while people may be aware of a generic or moral norm against intergroup discrimination, they may also in some salient intergroup contexts be affected by a specific ideological or social-conventional norm that legitimizes national intergroup bias (Amiot & Bourhis, 2003, 2005aRutland et al, 2007).…”